Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 109874 (ALL)

MANOJ KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

CRLR/6349/2024 · 2025-05-26

Subhash Chandra Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90723 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6349 of 2024 Revisionist :- Manoj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Adil Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 10.10.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Budaun in Criminal Misc. Case No.503 of 2021 (Smt. Nisha Kashyap vs. Manoj Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Ujhani, District Budaun, during the pendency of application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the revisionist is working as constable in U.P. Police and opposite party no.2 is wife with whom he entered into marriage on 23.05.2020 and marriage was got registered with the competent authority but it was got registered under fraud by the opposite party no.2. Further submits that prior to entering into marriage with the revisionist her marriage was settled with some other person from whom she took a lot of money and then settled the matter. He further submits that she has also entered into second marriage with some Sakshi Singh and living with him. She is graduate and works as private teacher in school and also teaches tuition and is able to maintain herself. The learned trial court without considering the aforesaid facts passed the order dated 10.10.2024 fixing the amount of maintenance Rs.5000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application which is excessive, therefore, request to reduce the amount and modify the order fixing the amount of maintenance from the date of order on the place of from the date of application. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. Considering the facts and circumstances, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no.2 is admittedly wedded wife of the revisionist. Their marriage was registered in the office of Sub- Registrar, Budaun on 03.11.2020. The revisionist misbehaved the opposite party no.2 and also he used to send obscene messages by making false Facebook I.D. regarding which she lodged an F.I.R. as Crime No.191 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. & Section 66 I.T. Act. When she objected he threatened her to kill. The revisionist has made several allegations against the character of the opposite party no.2 but there is no any such evidence on record to show that after marriage with the revisionist either she is living separate from him voluntarily or she is living in adultery. There is no any evidence on record to show that she has entered into marriage with some Sakshi Singh. The opposite party no.2 is wife of the revisionist and living separate from him with sufficient reason having no source of income to maintain herself and the revisionist being husband and able bodied person is under legal obligation to maintain his wife unless she is living apart from him with consent or she is living in adultery. The revisionist is constable in Police Department and gets salary Rs.40,000/- per month out of which Rs.5000/- per month as maintenance in favour of wife cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. In view of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and another (2021) 2 SCC 324 the amount of maintenance is to be awarded from the date of application on the place of date of order for maintaining uniformity. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, it warrants no interference by this court but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad